2013-04-24_REVISION - C1981010

• Permit No: C1981010
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 4/24/2013
• Doc Name: Proposed Decision Letter & Form and Attachments
• From: DRMS
• To: Trapper Mining, Inc
• Type & Sequence: TR111
• Email Name: JLE
• Email Name: SB1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
MEMO
April 24, 2013 4
From: Jared Ebert, DRMS
To: Trapper Mine; C- 1981 -010; TRl 11 File
RE: Trapper Mine, C- 1981 -010; TRI I I, 2012 Annual Reclamation Report Review
COLORADO
ID IV I S I O N O F
RECLAMATION
MINING
SAFETY
John W. Hickenlooper
Governor
Mike King
Executive Director
Loretta Pineda
Director
The Division reviewed the 2012 annual reclamation report submitted as a revision to Appendix W of the
permit (TR111). In accordance with the permit, Appendix W will be revised each year by March 15.
The Division received TR111 on March 14, 2012. The report contains all of the information required by
Rule 2.04.13(1) and (2):
2.04.13(1):
(a) The name and address of the permittee is provided.
(b) The location and number of acres disturbed during 2012 are discussed in Section 1.2.1 in
Appendix W. Trapper created 1.2 acres of new disturbance in the M -Pit area. Also,
approximately 11.5 acres has been re- disturbed in the F -Pit area. Re- disturbance occurred in
parcels that have received Phase I and Phase 11 bond release. Table 1.2 of Appendix W indicates
which parcels have been re- disturbed and these parcels are depicted on Map 1 included in
Appendix W. The acreages associated with Phase I and II bond release reported on the Division's
annual report form have been updated correctly to account for the re- disturbance.
(c) The location and number of acres backfilled and graded during 2012 are discussed in Section
1.2.2 and depicted on Map 1 of Appendix W. Map 1 depicts the topography of the graded areas.
Using ArcMap, the Division was able to georeference Map 1 (Sheets 1 to 3) and the currently
approved Map M12, the Post Mine Topography Map and overlay these maps to compare the actual
graded topography and the approved post mine topography. The Division drew 8 transects through
the backfilled and graded parcels. Where each of these transect intersected an index line on Map
M12, an elevation point was placed on the transect. At each elevation point, the Division
interpolated the elevation at that point based on the topographic lines Depicted on Map M1. Using
Microsoft Excel®, the Division was able to log the elevation at each elevation point interpolated
from Map 1 and Map M12 and use this information to create a cross section from each transect for
an easy comparison. Attachment 1 with this memo is an ArcMap depicting the location of each
transect and elevation point. Attachment 2 is the Microsoft Excel® Tables used to compare the
topography. The graded land ranged from 17 feet lower to 34.1 feet higher than the projected post
mine elevations based on Map M12. On average, the difference between the actual graded
elevation and the projected post mine elevation was negligible, approximately 4.6 feet higher.
The shape of the topography in terms of aspect and slope of the graded area is very similar to the
approved post mine topography. Given the negligible difference in elevations found at each
Office of Office of
Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Mines